On 2013-05-26, at 21:21, Spiro Trikaliotis wrote: >> 1571 supposedly does the same for track 18 but it wastes almost whole >> track 53 and allocates in the BAM. Hence the question: why bother >> allocating if those blocks are not taken into account anyway? Maybe >> because in 1571 "blocks free" AND/OR other routines don't know that >> this track is now used for extended BAM? > > The 1571 executes $d075, like the 1541, but then executes at $a951 for > the second side. ($d097: jmp $a951) > > In the loop $a96d-$a97a, I cannot see any special handling for track 53. > I cannot see any special handling for it in the preparation $a962-$a967. > Thus, I would think that for the 1571, track 53 is fully taken into > account, that is, no special handling occurs (or I am blind). This might make sense then. If there is no special handling of this track in the code, then the easiest way to disallow various routines from writing sectors there was probably to just allocate all of them. But still - why waste 18 perfectly healthy blocks? Looks somewhat like a quick kludge just to push the drive out.. -- SD! Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2013-05-27 01:00:07
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.